Ex-Military Destroys Tank Enthusiast

Ex-Military Destroys Tank Enthusiast

Tactical Beef

4 дня назад

2,731,395 Просмотров

Ссылки и html тэги не поддерживаются


Комментарии:

@ukquestionnaires5842
@ukquestionnaires5842 - 08.06.2025 19:41

I'd love to see the full calculation, i assume he's on about defending the 2nd amendment, I also assume he took the whole the whole area of America and devided it by the amount of tanks. This doesn't really convey the reality things as not the whole area of America is populated, and most of this area is so scarcely occupied. You'd only need very few tanks in population centres to establish total control, and small arms would be ineffective. The Second Amendment no longer really stands to work in the face of the overwhelming might of military power. It'd be similar to colonial times where being armed with old weaponry didn't really help the inhabitants. This also ignores the fact that tanks are no longer the cutting edge of war. The real question is, what would small arms do to a drone, ICBM, plane, carrier, or whatever blacksite tech is sitting in storage

Ответить
@ziongreen1725
@ziongreen1725 - 08.06.2025 19:48

Thats not how tanks are deployed or used at all in battle.

Ответить
@morbiussire401
@morbiussire401 - 08.06.2025 19:49

Like with any singular weapon system it is not all encompassing in the right conditions a single person can take out any weapon system so when one weapon system faces even as few as 10s of people (10-99) chances are at least one of them is gonna be in a position to destroy it given they have at least decent equipment.

Ответить
@luke-e1t
@luke-e1t - 08.06.2025 19:53

Whooooo look at him get mad
wtf is he talking about
American tanks at war on every piece of the earth at the same time ?!

Ответить
@Clevelandsteamer324
@Clevelandsteamer324 - 08.06.2025 19:56

USMC had to give all of their’s to Army

Ответить
@hunterfromhalo
@hunterfromhalo - 08.06.2025 20:27

Tanks today don't play as pivotal of a role as they did in like ww2

Ответить
@finnji7328
@finnji7328 - 08.06.2025 21:09

the M1 isn't even that good

Ответить
@wild1246
@wild1246 - 08.06.2025 21:31

This guys got no clue what he’s talking about Germans had less tanks than the U.S. but that the tiger absolutely dominated in tank battles but the U.S pushed out so many more tanks so we already know it possible for us to start mass production

Ответить
@GodPain93
@GodPain93 - 08.06.2025 21:43

remember you dont want to find Landmines the hard way

Ответить
@aaronderossett3998
@aaronderossett3998 - 08.06.2025 23:00

well tanks usually don't go on blind search missions. I think the military uses information intelligence to know where the enemy is and where to go. Ill let ya know when that 1 Abrams tank drives down the road looking for anything, I guess

Ответить
@fallenmarker9214
@fallenmarker9214 - 08.06.2025 23:01

POV simple history or infographics show viewers regurgitating shit they heard from those channels

Ответить
@ilias_requiem6786
@ilias_requiem6786 - 08.06.2025 23:24

American delusion at it's peak 😂😂😂

Ответить
@Sinpickles
@Sinpickles - 08.06.2025 23:28

This guy clearly knows all war strategies. He should be supreme general overlord!!! Dork.

Ответить
@Vojvoda595
@Vojvoda595 - 08.06.2025 23:30

The average lifespan of a tank on the battlefield is 15 minutes.

Ответить
@kittygamer1340
@kittygamer1340 - 08.06.2025 23:32

I like it at 44410 likes 🎉

Ответить
@pourdelargent
@pourdelargent - 08.06.2025 23:43

The thing is that you dont need to disperse them equally

U need to concentrate in stratégic spot

Ответить
@milesnugent5916
@milesnugent5916 - 08.06.2025 23:50

The Tank meta is over though, so doesn't even matter lol

Ответить
@papercitadel
@papercitadel - 09.06.2025 00:06

This is a dumb argument . The tanks wouldnt spread out like that, thats dumb. Theyd be overwatching large areas from high ground, or cutting/pinning off pathways. As a veteran i feel like hed know how tanks operate lol

Ответить
@joaquimfranciscomagalhaes8928
@joaquimfranciscomagalhaes8928 - 09.06.2025 00:08

Well Russia found out the hard way that tanks alone will not cut it. Nowadays with ATGMs and Drones, a single soldier can take out a tank easily.

Ответить
@Splat55099
@Splat55099 - 09.06.2025 00:08

Okay but imagine 100 tanks coming at you at once.

Ответить
@LEterribleONE
@LEterribleONE - 09.06.2025 00:17

That's why electric robot tanks are a thing. Runs on magic. Designed for a one way trip more often than not.

Ответить
@bobmasty5233
@bobmasty5233 - 09.06.2025 00:33

The west should be really worried. Has anyone watched the Chinese drone shows Thousands of drones in perfect formation. Now think if they have even basic AI . The West gave away All their secrets for Chinese money

Ответить
@H8TRG8TR
@H8TRG8TR - 09.06.2025 00:33

And tbh it could still preform, if it ran of pixie dust and all that 😂

Ответить
@Superliegebeest0
@Superliegebeest0 - 09.06.2025 00:45

Tanks are outdated an old su64 or whatever they're called from russia from the 70s is just as good as a top of the line brand new tank. A drone can take them out. And price wise you can buy a lot of drones for 1 tank. If you look at resent history sandalslippers with an AK and a homedepot eid here and there couple drones. And no top down organization at all can be a pain in the ass. It all comes down to money in the end. Korea Vietnam Iraq Afghanistan you only last so long.

Ответить
@jeffreybrown5756
@jeffreybrown5756 - 09.06.2025 01:22

Discussion was about the United States being invaded! And how our military would have huge gaps!

Ответить
@ianking.5721
@ianking.5721 - 09.06.2025 01:29

Who would want to be a tank crew with modern drones and atgms? Not me..

Ответить
@floofer6699
@floofer6699 - 09.06.2025 01:38

the abrams. a tank that cannot do urban warefare. 18~mm of actual side armor, i think its 30 ish effective mm's. literally only good hull down from miles away.

Ответить
@yobelpetra8652
@yobelpetra8652 - 09.06.2025 01:58

Logistic is the mother of war .

Ответить
@jup9975
@jup9975 - 09.06.2025 02:59

The point of a tank, or any specialized equipment, is that it only works if you put it near the enemy. Obvious ragebait

Ответить
@baked_beans_779
@baked_beans_779 - 09.06.2025 04:30

We be getting angy

Ответить
@robertpayne6781
@robertpayne6781 - 09.06.2025 04:59

Except you don't need to cover the entire country, just the major cities and transport routes, so reduce that 750 square miles by a very very very large amount

Ответить
@Turd-l2l
@Turd-l2l - 09.06.2025 05:11

🤓🤓🤓they actually have about 10,000 if you add up active duty and reserve

Ответить
@timothysnyder1070
@timothysnyder1070 - 09.06.2025 05:19

When did you serve?

Ответить
@Sparten7F4
@Sparten7F4 - 09.06.2025 05:43

My guy is doing republicans math lmao.

The tank isn’t needed to cover forests and cornfields.

Ответить
@Oblacoo71
@Oblacoo71 - 09.06.2025 05:53

Tanks have power with infantry and other tanks accompanying them

Ответить
@js-de4te
@js-de4te - 09.06.2025 06:16

Also the Abram’s is literally the most advanced and modern tank in the world

Ответить
@johnstarnes9499
@johnstarnes9499 - 09.06.2025 06:24

How many of those did biden give afgan?

Ответить
@St.JohnWort
@St.JohnWort - 09.06.2025 06:30

Dude forgot about mass military mobilization and that battlefields where these tanks would be operating in are generally confined to a small front or campaign, not an entire region of the world. Modern wars won't be fought with 8,500 Abram tanks, that is our peacetime numbers, WW3 would be fought with tens-of-thousands if not hundreds-of-thousands of tanks. That and the fact he knows absolutely zilch about the intended operation of tanks on the battlefield as a strategic resource. They aren't an all-purpose fighting vehicle, they are intended for a select few tactics on the battlefield and are generally meant for combating other tanks/armored vehicles. The very reason why soon after the invasion of Iraq in 2003, we stopped mobilizing our Abrams tanks and put them in warehouses in the US, there were no use cases for modern tanks on an unconventional battlefield fighting terrorist groups.

Ответить
@padtixx5441
@padtixx5441 - 09.06.2025 06:32

I reckon the Ukrainian war had given the abrhams team a few new lines of investigation as a 20 dollar target drone dropping a grenade on the fan opening has crippled a couple

Ответить
@кек-ю7щ
@кек-ю7щ - 09.06.2025 06:42

Say hello to 2 FPV drones and your abrams were annihilated 😂

Ответить
@motow3031
@motow3031 - 09.06.2025 07:08

Russia understands modern warfare

Ответить
@ASDASD-zl7ds
@ASDASD-zl7ds - 09.06.2025 07:18

yeah like russia is destroying them so every 750 sq mile is not covered anymore

Ответить
@FrozenHawkHunter
@FrozenHawkHunter - 09.06.2025 07:19

So how many shoulder fured weapons systems do we got?

Ответить
@harpingaming2864
@harpingaming2864 - 09.06.2025 07:29

If it were up to me air superiority and cas matters way more than ground forces. Like what are they gonna use to defend when everything is turned to ashes?

Ответить
@victoria383
@victoria383 - 09.06.2025 07:52

40 year old machines

Ответить
@jeanc.m.a3982
@jeanc.m.a3982 - 09.06.2025 07:54

well they are not working i still don't understand how tanks are part of modern warfare knowing the fact they can be taking out by a 1000 $ drone

Ответить
@justinteichroeb1221
@justinteichroeb1221 - 09.06.2025 08:37

And drones will destroy them because they hardly have any armor on the top. Already seen it done. Tanks are becoming a weapon of the past, war changes often. Went from standing in a line shooting muskets to digging trenches and taking trench by trench then ww2 and now modern warfare.

Ответить
@zoezoehill7089
@zoezoehill7089 - 09.06.2025 08:48

We got the death hand 🤚🚬🫡🇷🇺

Ответить
@mryuuochung
@mryuuochung - 09.06.2025 09:56

not sure how important that is, tanks are typically consolidated for armored spearheads for breaking fortified positions, not necessarily for "covering" area

Ответить
@ajcastellanos7552
@ajcastellanos7552 - 09.06.2025 10:29

Ok but tanks don’t operate alone in our military we’re really good at combined arms warfare so what was the point he was makinf

Ответить